Investigation of the Relationship between Pre-service Science Teachers' Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge regarding the Particulate Nature of Matter

Abstract

The aim of this research is to analyze whether there is a relationship between subject matter knowledge (SMK) related to the key concepts take part in 6th class “particulate nature of matter” unit and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of the pre-service science teachers. The participants of the study consisted of five pre-service science teachers who were enrolled at Gazi University at the Department of Elementary Science Education senior class in 2007 – 2008. In the study “case study research method” which is a sort of “qualitative research methodology” was used. Data was gathered via observations, interviews and document analysis methods. . In the analyses of the semi structured interviews, video records and documents made with pre-service teachers; descriptive analysis, content analysis and comparison techniques were used together. Data collected from the sample of the research shows that the pre-service teachers have inadequacies in SMK related to the concepts analyzed in the scope of this research. These inadequacies in pre-service teachers’ SMK limit the activities (planning and implementation) which are used through teaching process. In consequence, it is ascertained that SMK is interrelated with PCK and must be investigated together with PCK.

Keywords

• Teacher Training,Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK),Subject Matter Knowledge (SMK)

Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Maddenin Tanecikli Yapısı Ünitesine Ait Konu Alan Bilgileri ile Pedagojik Alan Bilgileri Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Fen bilgisi öğretmeni adayıdır. 6.sınıf “oluşum tanecikli yapısı” ünitesinde yer alan anahtar kavramları adresleri alan alanları ve pedagojik alan alanları inceleyerek, bu iki bilgi türü arasında bir ilişki süresi açısından araştırmaktır. Nitel araştırma metodolojisinin desenleri çalışma yöntemiyle çalışma araştırması çalışma grubunu 2007 - 2008 öğretim kodu Gazi Üniversitesi, Fen Fakültesi Öğretmenliği Bölümü'nde sınıfta öğrencilerim gören 5 öğretmen adayı bulunuyor. Araştırma sonuçları, gözlem, görüşme ve değerlendirme. Öğretmen adaylarıyla yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler, video ders kayıtlarının ve güneşlenmeların analizinde betimsel analiz, içerik analizi ve sürekli karşılaştırmalar. ARAŞTIRMANIN işbaşında elde edilen veriler, öğretmen adaylarının araştırılması konusu konu alan kaynaklıde eksiklikler vardır. Öğretmen adaylarının konu alan içeriğideki bu eksiklikler, öğretmenlik uygulaması hazır çizimleri planı uygulama) sınırlandırmıştır. Araştırma konusu konu alan bilgisinin pedagojik alan bilgisi (PAB) ile birlikte bir bilgi türü olduğu ve PAB ile birlikte araştırılması gerektiği tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

• Öğretmen Eğitimi, Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (PAB), Konu Alan Bilgisi

References

1. Atasoy, B., Genç, E., KadayLfçL,H. & AkkuM, H. (2007). 7. SLnLf Ö rencilerinin Fiziksel ve Kimyasal
2. De iMmeler Konusunu AnlamalarLnda Mbirlikli Ö renmenin Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi
3. E itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 12-21.
4. Ayas, A. (1995). “Lise I Kimya Ö rencilerinin Maddenin Tanecikli YapLsL KavramLnL Anlama Seviyelerine liMkin Bir ÇalLMma”, II. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri E itimi Sempozyumunda Sunulmu Bildiri, ODTÜ E itim Fakültesi, Ankara.
5. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., ve Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers' mathematical knowledge In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
6. Boz,N. & Boz, Y. (2008). A Qualitative Case Study of Prospective Chemistry Teachers’ Knowledge About Instructional Strategies: Introducing Particulate Theory. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19 (2), 135-156.
7. Carlsen, W. S. (1999). Domains of teacher education. In J. Gess-Newsome and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge, (133-144). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
8. Cohen, D. K., McLaughlin, M. W. & Talbert, J. E. (1993). Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey- Boss.

9. Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative nquiry and research: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
10. Dani, D. E. (2004). The mpact of content and pedagogy courses on sc ence teachers’ pedagog cal content knowledge. Ph.D Thesis, University of Cincinnati.
11. Davis, C. E. (2003). Prospective teachers subject matter knowledge of similarity. Mathematics educations . Ph.D Thesis, Raleigh.
12. Demircio lu, H., Ayas, A. & Demircio lu, G. (2002). “SLnLf Ö retmen AdaylarLnLn Kimya KavramlarLnL Anlama Düzeyleri ve KarMLlaMLlan YanLlgLlar”, V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik E itimi Kongresinde Sunulmu Bildiri, ODTÜ E itim Fakültesi, Ankara.
13. Driver, R., SquLres, A., Rushworth, P. & Wood-RobLnson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary
14. science, London: Routledge.
15. Erdem, M. (2005). Ö retmenlik Mesle ine Giri . stanbul: Epsilon YayLncLlLk.
16. Gabel, D. L., Samuel, K. V. & Hunn, D. (1987). Understanding the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 64 (8), 695-697.
17. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Gudmundsdottir, S. & Shulman, L. (1987). Pedagogical content knowledge in social studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 31(2), 59-70.
19. Hashweh, M. Z. (1987). Effects of subject-matter knowledge in the teaching of biology and physics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 109–120.
20. IMLksal, M. (2006). A study on pre-serv ce elementary mathemat cs teachers’ subject matter knowledge and pedagog cal content knowledge regard ng the mult pl cat on and d v s on of fract ons. Ph.D Thesis ,METU.
21. Jones, A. & Moreland, J. (2005). The centrability PCK in Professional development for primary science and technology teachers: Towards school-wide reform.In Rodriques, S.(Eds.), International Perspectives on Teacher Professional Development (pp.57-78). Nova Science Publishers.
22. Karasar, N. (1991). Bilimsel Ara t rma Yöntemi. (4.baskL). Ankara.
23. Kaya, O.N (2008). The nature of relationships among the components of pedagogical content knowledge of preservice science teachers: ‘Ozone layer depletion’ as an example. International Journal of Science Education, 1-28.
24. Küçükahmet, L. (2008). Etkili Ö retimin lkeleri. Türkiye Özel Okullar Birli i Dergisi, 3, 28-35.
25. Lee, O., Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Berkheimer, G. D. & Blakeslee, T. D. (1993). Changing middle school students’ conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30 (3), 249-270.
26. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J. & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
27. Marek, E. A., Eubanks, C. , Gallaher, T. (1990). Teachers' understanding and the use of the learning cycle. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (9), 821-834.
28. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3-11.
29. MEB, Talim ve Terbiye Genel Kurulu BaMkanlL L. (2005). Dlkö retim Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi (4.- 5. S n flar) Ö retim Program . Ankara.
30. MEB, Talim ve Terbiye Genel Kurulu BaMkanlL L. (2006). Dlkö retim Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi (6. - 7. - 8. S n flar) Ö retim Program . Ankara.
31. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London:Sage Publication.
32. Nakhleh, M. B. &Samarapungavan, A. (1999). Elementary school children’s beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (7), 777-805.
33. Park, S. & Oliver, J.S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38 (3), 261-284.
34. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand; Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
35. Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1), 1-22.
36. Smith, D. C., Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 1–20.
37. Staley, K. N., (2004). Tracing the development of understanding rate of change: a case study of changes in a pre-service teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge. Ph D Thesis, Raleigh.
38. Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4 (2), 99-110.
39. Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions
40. in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159-169.
41. UMak, M. (2005). Fen bilgisi ö retmen adaylar n n çiçekli bitkiler konusundaki pedagojik alan bilgileri. YayLnlanmamLM doktora tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi E itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
42. Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86, 572-590.
43. Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N. & De Vos, W. (1998). developing science teachers’pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 (6), 673-695.
44. Verloop, N. (1992). Craft knowledge of teachers: A blind spot in educational research. Pedagogical Studies, 69, 410-423.
45. YLldLrLm, A. ve YimMek, H. (2005). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Ara t rma Yöntemleri. (5. BaskL). Ankara: Seçkin YayLncLlLk.